Tímarit Verkfræðingafélags Íslands - 01.12.1967, Page 296

294
TlMARIT VFI 1967
tion and starvation among vast sectors of the
world population. And reports are continuously
coming in, and volumes are published, showing
that the nutritional gap is still rather widening
than the opposite. We are told of millions of
children who begin to develop crippling diseases
of protein deficiency as soon as they are weaned
from their mothers’ breasts, if not before. And
these children may need only let’s say 20-30
grams of FPC a day, which, according to the
latest figures, is a very inexpensive dose. The
technical possibility is obviously there to remedy
this situation to a significant extent. But isn’t
the effort to improve this product going too far
ahead, actually, of the attempts to make this
come true and to turn it into a business pro-
position? Now, I don’t really know where those
who are engaged in the production of FPC,
primarily expect it to be marketed. One comment,
which one hears rather often, is: „Well, we know
these poor people are starving, but what can
we do, they have no money to pay for that
which is necessary to improve their nutritional
standards. Now, I should like to ask: Are there
not some countries where you know that there
is, even that relatively slight, purchasing power
which is necessary to buy these products, even
if they are not, at the moment, commercially
established? It seems to me that, actually, we
have had now for several years products which
were good enough to be sold, and sound enough
and safe enough, and that those who are work-
ing on the development of this must go much
farther than has been done hitherto after the
marketing of these products. Many years ago
the Viobin Corp. claimed that they had a product
good enough — the Canadians have said so —
the Swedes have said so — and I am inclined
to think that they are all correct. Thereby I
am not saying that the present product is not
better. It probably is. But compared with the
other foodstuffs, which the undemourished
people consume, I am inclined to believe that
even the earlier versions were much better than
what they are used to, and it is a fact that they
would have done the trick of proteinfeeding
them. It is obviously good to keep on refining
the sea products but I think they are good
enough already, and even have been for some
time. The principal necessity now is to take large
and decisive steps to get them to where they
are needed. There is a lot of talk always, when
FPCs are on the agenda, of the vast resources
of the oceans and people calculate how many
people can be put on a normal health level by
utilizing these resources. Not only those which
are still unused, but also those which are al-
ready used and turned into fishmeal for stock-
feed. In spite of this it seems to me that progress
in the actual utilization for human consumption
has been so slight, in fact so insignificant, that
I am wondering whether now that we have even
a better product the situation is not going to
remain somewhat the same. It seems that many
people are expecting and waiting for some of the
rieh countries to begin giving these product
away and apparently the U.S. is planning to do
so, possibly on a large scale, but even that is
a iong way from having turned this into a com-
mercial proposition. It is good to know that you
have made a good product, better product, but,
as I said, there have been good products —
potentially on the market for many years and
they have not been used. Such tasteless, refined
products as the one described by Dr. Pariser
should undoubtedly have a great marketing
potential, not only among the presently under-
nourished peoples, but also, and in many forms,
among the more developed nations. Along with
this, though, I have often wondered whether the
underdeveloped nations might not indeed wel-
come a certain, or even a strong, fishy taste.
Would not this be benefical and serve to dispel
the monotony of the rather tasteless concoctions
which I presume they mostly eat. Ordinary fish
meal, made under sanitary conditions from
normal, unspoiled raw material, and extracted,
if you like, is essentially as good nutritionally
as these new products. It has the nutritive value,
it is not dangerous for health, and it is available
in quantity at a low price. It is purely a question
of experience, usage, and education whether you
like the taste or not. We need here some long
range planning and salesmanship. I think we
should send out a number of capable experts
to study the eating habits of the people in the
vast potential undeveloped markets, and experi-
ment with the incorporation of fish meal, more
or less refined, in their food. Prepare new recipies
to their taste. Why should they not be delighted
by a strong fishy taste with their rice, roots,
and cabbages? Such promoticnal work would
take time, but it would be successful, not only
as a method of building up sales, but also as a
way to combat malnutrition. I am convinced that
a concerted effort of this type could bring quick
results, and that it is essential if we are to get
anywhere beyond the fruitless statistics of